Planet-Love.com Searchable Archives

Pete

If, however, she will be meeting Pete, his ex, and others to compile anecdotal evidence, she can write a book condemning this social phenomenon or praising it and find plenty of evidence to support either position.  If the focus of her background is as others have reported it here, it is unlikely she will posit the latter.

***Provided she keeps in mind Mark Twain's quote: "There are three kinds of lies.  Lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Hamlet

Pete

I'd say be super-careful about how you choose your words, and stay away from loaded, political terms.  Tell your wife to also keep in mind that every word she says is being analyzed, so she can't get too comfortable.  That doesn't mean you shouldn't be genuine, but don't loosely use words which for the researchers might have more political meanings than they do for you.

Good luck :)) I'm curious to know how this all goes.

Pete

Some questions for her might be:

    What is the objective of your research?
    What is the hypothesis you are attempting to test?
    Do you have any predictions on the outcome of your research?
    What aspects of these relationships do you find most interesting?
    What are your core feelings and attitudes toward these relationships?
    How are these different than the same sub-strata found in the U.S.?
    Given your previous employments, memberships, and writings, how do you intend to overcome the perception of bias?

I don't think any of us are worried about her researching and reporting on the methods and/or processes involved.  Rather we are concerned about the value judgments, conclusions, and recommendataions for public policy that she may make.  These are actually limited beyond the scope of science.

In this case, she is dealing with behavioral phenomena.  In order to arrive at a conclusion, she must use observable, measurable data.  Value judgments, likewise, are not based on measureable, repeatable observations.  Questions about "how" or "why" and value judgments are not measurable, and are therefore beyond the scope of scientific research.  Science as such can describe, but not explain.

If she wants to become the true "Margaret Mead" of this generation of researchers, she needs to describe this phenomenon and its proper place in the rapid globalization that is taking place.  If not, her shining star will fade when the current trend of political correctness ends--and, eventually it will end as do all political trends and mindsets.  

Margaret Mead's work in Samoa may have postumously earned her the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and has greatly influenced public policy in this country.  However, with public acclaim also comes the microscope of academic scrutiny.  Her shining star is losing much of its luster.  Yes, all of the phenomena described in her book existed, at least in isolated pockets or subgroups, in Samoa.  Yet, many of her conclusions derived about the casual nature of intimate relations and commitment were fanciful or distorted.  She told the story of one side of Samoan society without describing the others.

As far as I can tell, no one has truly investigated this phenomenon without having an underlying motivational objective.  So, there is true potential in this topic.  On the other hand, she needs to evenhandedly describe as many facets of this as possible without making value judgments.  

Is she going to go beyond the sterotypes?  If not, her work will end up collecting dust on the back shelf of some university library.

Pete, given the samll number of people that ever actually read these things, I see minimal risk in your involvement.  The only condition I would make of her would be to have permission to screen the final work prior to publication to insure the accuracy of your portion in the work.

Of course, this advise is worth about what you paid for it...

Sincerely,

Mark

I don't think the comparison with Margaret Mead is all that relevant, considering that in the 19th and early 20th century, cultural anthropology was conducted without a serious interrogation of Culture, personal culture, cultural assumptions, etc. Cultural Studies itself is a very recent field which rests on new critical frameworks.  Mead didn't have this framework behind her, while Felicity does (and, hopefully, a better awareness of the "personal junk" she brings to the table).

That said, there is never any guarantee because we are all human and some things are too deeply rooted to escape even the keenest self-scrutiny.  But I do think that contemporary researchers are more aware of the traps than their predecessors.

Feminism is a legit framework in critical theory, and Chicano Studies is an equally legit sub-area of American Cultural Studies.  It has nothing to do with victimhood, but with allowing minority groups to analyze issues pertinent to them. Sure, one of the issues will be past oppression and present difficulties in receiving equal treatment.  However unpleasant and irritating this might be to some of you, it is a reality which others less privileged have to face on a daily basis.  If there had been no suppression, there would have been no reaction.  

It also bothers me when people take it personally that other groups strive for rights.  Sure, there are extreme elements out there: there are "femi-nazis," there are racist blacks, there are fundamentalist Christians and Muslims.  However, they are only the tip of the iceberg, albeit a very vocal tip.  To identify an entire movement with its most extreme elements is a poor strategy, which only showcases superficiality and bias.  Why does it bother so many people that Chicanos are having their culture recognized, or that feminism looks at the world from a gender-ized perspective?  Do you feel threatened?  

Also, the fact that a woman chooses to stay home and look after her children doesn't mean that she is pandering to patriarchal ideals.  She has simply made the choice that worked for her.  What is relieving is that, now, she has other options and she is not artificially restricted to one role.  Those women you talk about were extreme while in college because they were young, unformed, and excited to find new ways of thinking - no one is born a critical thinker, so it takes time to learn to assess and integrate these new ways.  When they graduated, they presumably knew themselves better and had filtered the propaganda from the truth.  There is nothing anti-feminist about being feminine, dressing well, and taking a well-paying job: this is precisely what our predecessors strove for.  Feminism is about being able to go to college if you wish, being able to apply for well-paying jobs, and being able to choose.  Birkenstocks, hairy legs, and hatred of men are just unsavoury aspects no balanced woman will take seriously.

Sorry if this turned out to be a bit long, but it upsets me to see someone put down because she is a woman.  If a male professor gave a lecture on Chicanos, would he have been accused of professional victimhood? I believe not.

PS: note that the problems I have voiced are with attitudes, and not with people.  I would greatly appreciate it if further responses avoided the "ad hominem" trap.  I don't want to read cheap potshots about my character, my supposed lesbian tendencies, and other equally mindless comments people make when they have nothing relevant to say.  Let's keep some dignity - just saying that because, in my forum experience, this happens quite often.

What color is the sky in your world?

Chicanos: Balkanize, revise, blame, usurp.

What is taught on campus is somewhat sanitized.  But follow their forums, columns, speeches, essays...

What a movement.

Fortunately, not all Latinos are as one-dimensional and self-serving as the Chicanos.  And not all women are Gloria Steinem.

[Disclaimer:  Not a bigot, just a closet observer]

I did however, read her resume. I’ll stand by my statement of ‘professional victim’ or at least ‘professional victims’ advocate’. And yes, there are men ‘professional victims’ also, some of them make a very lucrative living at it.

Do you see how see baits you into this.  You were one hundred percent right.

As the saying goes..."Nothing good can come of this"

Pete

Pete

See, that's the kind of attitude that drives me nuts: "after the Femi-nazi twists it," as if you can have any certainty until you actually read something; "she has one agenda" (as if you read anything she wrote or know anything about her as an individual, rather than as a stereotype); "research" in quotation marks to show that the work of a PhD means nothing because she is a woman; "will never be un-biased," again, as if knew anything about her methodology and subjected her works to careful scrutiny.

So much loaded content in one short sentence ... Thank God not every man out there is like you.

#2.  who are the ones scrutinizing her works??  yes, her fellow, left wing femi-nazis

#3.  like I have posted in the past here, PhD's come a dime a dozen...that doesn't impress me, nor does a study from a PhD prove that it is true and unbiased.  I could probably do a google search right now and find studies done by PhDs that have proven to be biased and plain out fraudulent.

#4.  with all due respect Felinessa, you know zero about these women (latinas), their culture, and their way of thinking.

But I do respect your opinions and I do hope you can respect mine...enjoy the rest of your weekend!!

I learned some things but if my introduction was indicative of women's studies as a serious academic 'discipline' I can understand why some newspaper editorial writers bemoan the atmosphere of political correctness and quasi-scientific 'research' so common on today's college campuses.

Pete

What i thought was funny was after graduation, many of those hardcore fem students integrated back into a male dominated society and became "feminine", got good paying jobs, never again helped their oppress "sisters".  On of my ex an major feminist in college, got married to some rich boy and became a mom, not even working.  Ironic because on thing feminist strive for is equality in the workforce.  I had more respect for some female student that kept their conviction/belief and ended working in women right type organization or charity.  

Pete

They have a way of making you feel comfortable during the interviews... Then, when the story hits print, you're wondering WTF happened as they put their own spin on your words & actions... Been there, done that...

You've been warned...

Pete

You said "Hey if I can walk around in El Centro and nobody f--ks with me why do I have to be scared here?"

I don't care where you live or visit....NEVER, EVER get too dayyum cocky! A little bit of fear/respect will always help keep you alive & well! One last thing in what you think her piece may be about.....Hope for the best, but expect the worse!

Always, watch your back....

Pete

How does she intend to get into the TLC party? by pretending to be a caleña or is she up front about who she is?

http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/ppfp/schaeffer-grabiel-cv.pdf

Good luck in her book Pete!! And by the way, PLEASE don't give her my telephone number!!  (-:

Item #1:

An event held at UC Santa Cruz in January:

Felicity Schaeffer-Grabiel,
University of California,
President's Postdoctoral Fellow

"Planet-Love.com: Cyber-brides and Transnational
Masculinity between Latin America and the U.S."

"This talk draws from chat discussions,
interviews, and textual analysis of an Internet
chat board called Planet Love where U.S. men seek
advice and a sense of community as they search
for a bride in Latin America. Men turn to the
global marketplace to reassert a nostalgic vision
of a high-powered masculinity in the family and
nation, and to select more able bodies for the
engineering of a new post-national family
structure and imaginary."

http://townsendcenter.berkeley.edu/listserv/0055.html

A nostalgic vision of high-powered masculinity???

To select more able bodies for the engineering of a family???

Come on.  Fess up, fellas.  Salvage her credibility/non-bias and admit you were interviewed.  Seems a little underhanded on her part, especially if the interviews never took place.

In any case, we're now New-Age, Macho-bots, ravenously hunting innocent luv wabbits abroad.

Item #2:

In a conference held last year by the American Studies Association, one aspect of her round-table contribution consisted of the following:

"She discusses the ways the Internet enables new alliances between women from across Latin America who create e-mail exchanges once they migrate to the U.S. to marry."

http://chnm.gmu.edu/asa/viewabstract.php?id=251&cf=2

When I first read that, it seemed as if she was hinting at "secret networks" of Latinas here in the U.S. who were coordinating our eventual emasculation.  

I'm kidding!  I was only partially paranoid after reading that.

And, finally, I hit the big nugget.

Item #3:

"Cyberbrides and Global Imaginaries:  Mexican Women’s
Turn From the National to the Foreign," Felicity Schaeffer-Grabiel, University of Minnesota

Though this comes off as a little unfair...

"...the fact [Fact?] that the majority of men from the United States come to Mexico to find a traditional-minded woman, in the hope of reasserting their masculinity and power in the home and workplace, complicates this image of the foreign 'feminist man.'” [Sounds similar to Item #1]

...on the whole, the article was very balanced.  Despite what the previous items might lead some to believe, she appears to be quite neutral--maybe even a somewhat supportive--of the MOB concept.

A few clips:

"The owner of the Latina Connection (TLC) Worldwide gave me permission
to attend the tour for research because my bicultural identity set me apart from the 'feminist type' whom he assumed would write a scathing report on these interactions.  I, on the other hand, spoke Spanish and was part Mexican, an offspring myself of a mixed Anglo/Mexican union.
The owner’s distrust of 'feminist types' has to do with critical activism by members of the National Organization for Women (NOW) and Gabriella Los Angeles, who have helped shut down mail-order bride agencies that cater to the Philippines."

"Women from Colombia, Asia, Russia [a swath of PL forums?], and Japan similarly justify their search for foreign men by degrading local men..."

"Aware that women in the United States are more liberal, that families are nuclear rather than extended, and that many women are more materialistic in the United States, most [Mexicanas interviewed] state the importance of holding onto spiritual and family traditions. Many women, especially those with children, know that they will have to 'sacrifice' their professions and families to find happiness with a foreigner."

In her conclusion, she notes:

"I hope to have disrupted an easy equation of the cyberbride industry, a global broker of love and marriage, as an institution that exploits poor, desperate, and unsuspecting women."

Find the entire article here:

http://sac.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/7/1/33

I think Pete won't have to wear the AFBC (Anti-feminist Body Condom) after all.  She appears to be genuine; no agenda; and is probably HOT!!

j/k.  Had to throw in some pig speak.

Peace out, yo!

[Edit:  to include final link]

If you play your cards right, you might get her to write about scammers - Cyber-Brides and the Leeching of the Unsuspecting Pocket.

It seems that a lot of those who put her down are unable to read: her PhD was in Latin American Studies, with a MINOR in Women's Studies.  The MINOR part is important because feminism provides the critical framework, while Latin America provides a sphere for factual research.

"If you look at her career, she has basically been paid by fellowships and grants since 1996. She seems to be tied into the money for her movement."

You make her sound like a prostitute.  She wasn't "paid." She won those fellowships because she published a lot, is professionally active, and her research is relevant to current policy making.  The money didn't come from "her movement" (you make it sound like a sect), but from research councils.  

Also, comments about how she is a femi-nazi or a lesbian, coming from people who know jackshit about what she does and who haven't bothered to actually read her work before passing judgement, are stupid and childish.  I'm sorry, guys, but opinions based on your uncultured prejudices aren't going to convince anyone.  Those who had read her expressed moderate or positive opinions, which says something.

Pete, you have a brain of your own and you can decide for yourself.  Read her past articles and her PhD thesis - that will give you a fair idea of her framework and methodology, as well as of her interests.  That's a much more sound basis for a decision than uninformed opinions coming from pure hatred and prejudice.

I can read as well as you can and without cherry picking words, it is obvious she has focused her career on FEMINIST studies.  It's not like she parlayed her "Latin American Studies" into anything else.

"If you look at her career, she has basically been paid by fellowships and grants since 1996. She seems to be tied into the money for her movement."

I stand by this statement because it raise the issue of bias. Many times, grants are funded by people who are pushing for some type of change whether legislative or otherwise.

"You make her sound like a prostitute."

Those are your words, not mine. I am raising issues that a reasonable person should be able to ask. We still have a right to question in this country. Don't forget it. You may have just come over here, sweetie, but some of us have been around a while and have legacies of family members dying for this right to stand up and question. Dont' get too emotional.

"She wasn't "paid." She won those fellowships because she published a lot, is professionally active, and her research is relevant to current policy making."

These grants were sought out by her. What policy is she trying to make? That's what I'd like to know.

"The money didn't come from 'her movement' (you make it sound like a sect), but from research councils."

Again, don't put words in my mouth. I never called it a "sect.' You are trying to classify my right to question and diminish it. That's not right. I never used terms such as "femi-nazi," etc. You are lumping everyone together and this is typical of someone who is unwilling to address real concerns. My concern is that she appears biased not just from her resume, but from her work. I looked for her articles on the web and have not been able to find any. You claim she is unbiased from these articles. Do you have any links?

Why don't you point us in the direction of those articles instead of attacking us as being childish, prejudiced, stupid and uncultured. It makes you sound arrogant and emotional. By the way, some of us might have gone to Harvard. Did you? ;)

These are the type of absurd conclusions that come when you say she has a bias just because she has a specific interest.  She writes a lot about women because she's interested in women's issues, not because she's biased towards women. She never published an article called "Men Suck."  

"Many times, grants are funded by people who are pushing for some type of change whether legislative or otherwise."

Is that change implicitly bad?  Look up her specific grants instead of generalizing: most come from the schools she attended, which means they were for academic excellence.  Then there were the Macarthur ones - http://www.macfound.org/.  This is a generic human rights organization, and not a "femi-nazi" one.  As far as legislative change goes, last time I checked it was necessary in order to update antiquated laws. I know, the right doesn't like that.

"I looked for her articles on the web and have not been able to find any. You claim she is unbiased from these articles. Do you have any links?"

I'm sorry, you'll have to use a library.  Universities need to make a buck too, so scholarly journals, even when available online, can be retrieved only though a project - like JSTOR.

" By the way, some of us might have gone to Harvard. Did you? ;)"

Sounds like Harvard doesn't teach critical thinking anymore ;)

I never suggested change is implicitly bad....why do you jump to such conclusions?  You have a habit of falsely positioning me. (augmentation, distortion) You have suggested I am "Right" wing.  False. (Contrivance) As far as her grants, again, I never used the phrase "femi-nazi" to describe her work. You must have aced Rhetoric 101.

Can you tell me what antiquated laws need updating?  Sometimes, using the ones on the books works just fine.

You might ask Larry Summers about someone's ability to think critically at Harvard.  He sure got torched when he suggested that that the under-representation of female scientists at elite universities may stem in part from “innate" differences between men and women.  Some think the "Left" has hijacked the field of critical thinking.  ;)

But your rhetoric is surreptitious and implies certain conclusions even though you don't come out and say them :)  Basically, it sounded to me like the questions were a bit leading.

"Do you think her article will be entitled, "Why American Men Seek Foreign Women: The Impact Of Feminism On The Weakening Between Male And Female Relationships In Our Society?" Haha, doubt it."

Honestly, I don't think there is anything new, revolutionary, or dangerous in this article - or anything that isn't really obvious.  Now I will qualify this by saying that I'm not a sociologist, I've never taken Cultural Studies, and this is just my own humble opinion from what I've observed on these forums: there are a lot of nice men who simply happen to prefer women of other backgrounds.  These men will seek women who match their interests, just as if they were dating locals. But there are also some who constantly criticize Western women for working, making their own money, and not taking crap, and who seek out, on purpose, women who are both poor and poorly educated, and whose only capital is their beauty; these guys need to know that they are in charge, and their MOBs will give them that in exchange for prosperity.  This is as old as the hills.  I wouldn't say that feminism weakened couple relationships, because most men, at least those who are straddling the political fence, treat women as equals and EXPECT their wives to work and contribute to everything.  Those who aren't down with this (or are simply very insecure human beings) have a number of choices, and finding a MOB from a traditional society is one of them (that's not to say that a guy with "liberated" views wouldn't want a foreign woman).  I do think, though, that the geographical area the bride is coming from would be determined by a man's gender politics: if you want a housewife, don't go for a Russian woman - they are educated and ambitious, for the most part, but a lot of men don't know this and get burned; I don't know Latinas and Asians enough to know how submissive or domestic they are, but I imagine Asians would be more likely to be both of the above.

As far as the changes in policy go, I think that the situation of the MOBs while in the US should be monitored closely.  Now you are (I imagine and hope) honest men who just want a wife; but I don't think that there aren't those who abuse their MOBs, or those who run sex-slave operations. I'm not saying you should have a social worker knocking on your door every week, but both partners should be able to periodically prove that their well-being was not affected.

"You have suggested I am "Right" wing."

Nope, I said the Right wing wouldn't like it.  I didn't say YOU were Right wing.  Others on this forum are, though, and my first post was actually addressing issues I'd culled from a number of  posts, so you shouldn't take everything personally.  The same for "femi-nazi" or the lesbian accusation.

"I never suggested change is implicitly bad"

Maybe I misunderstood you.  You talked about people "pushing" for change, whose motives should be questioned.  I find "pushing" to be a bit of a charged word, but maybe you didn't mean it like that.

And wow, do you make me sound machiavellian :p

I read you have an interest in the "mail order bride business". The use of this term exposes someone's agenda.
You're a smart woman, surely you can understand there is no such thing. You can't order a bride through a catalog.

SO, tell us, is being on this forum part of your research for your degree?

Wow, thank you for legitimizing the passtime that boggles all my friends' minds. Unfortunately, the only agenda I have is to kill time.  Oh, and I'm secretly jealous of the MOBs who milk unsuspecting Westerners and then marry their way here. I wish I'd have thought of that, but my parents taught me otherwise.

"SO, tell us, is being on this forum part of your research for your degree?"

Absolutely not, for a number of reasons:

1. Researchers should not participate, but observe.
2. If they participate, in order for their results to be ethical, they have to announce their presence.
3. My research is on representations of medieval women in the work of Renaissance women in England.

It's kind of funny that people are getting paranoid (I can almost hear some people thinking: "BS!! She's Grabiel Research Assistant from Hell, and she's trying to pull the wool over our eyes), but I honestly have nothing to do with this.  It's just a hobby, albeit, I admit, a strange one.

Pete, if you think her book is going to be unbiased, well...tread lightly my friend.  Can anyone say "femin-nazi"??

Pete

but then again, maybe Calipro can work his magic on her at the TLC social and get her to change her ways...LOL
just don't post any pics CP!!

Pete

I was just joking more than anything.  I'd probably talk to her.

Pete

Pete

Is it a book deal or a magazine article?  I'm not saying she's not a nice woman or anything, I'm just curious as to what her agenda is. What does bother me is that IF she writes a slanted paper, how will the other side be told?  

Follow the money...that will tell you her agenda.

But when i started traveling to COL/PERU i recognize that things are NOT equal.(DUH!).  Talking w/ the locals guys, if they had decent jobs/money they were loving life.  Almost all of them(esp COL) had a wife/serious GF BUT had couple of chicas on the side, no problem.  US Expat i've met there tend to start out "faithful" but then, especially after breaking up w/ their first Latina, they tend to promiscous as much as if not more than locals.  Can't blame em, kinda when in rome...  It's so readily available and with no reprecusion for them.  Unlike what we're taught in US.  

I look forward to her book, hopefully it gives a balance view on the social dynamic of the Latin society and NOT just Latinas..

Pete

Pete

Pete

Pete